Like the Vick's case?
2007-08-06 18:14:03 · 6 answers · asked by ilove_anairforce_soldier 1 in Sports ➔ Football (American)
Yes.
If it has been proven that they violated the personal conduct policy of the NFL (most any company has some version of this policy), then he can be banned - regardless of if he is found guilty or not. If there is enough proof that he knew about this, and allowed himself to be connected to this, thus bringing on a PR nightmare for the Falcons and NFL, they could can his happy butt, and ban him for life.
2007-08-06 18:20:52 · answer #1 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
"volleyballchick"...has it right, the position of the NFL will be that if he is found not guilty of commiting a crime, he SHOULD HAVE KNOWN what was happening on property owned by him and even at this point (Federal indictment), there is sufficient cause to beleive he has brought damage to the reputation of the Altlanta Falcons and the NFL. He will most likely NEVER play another down in the NFL.
2007-08-06 20:46:47 · answer #2 · answered by Rob D 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
has to be a reason. all players sign a morals clause as well.
in the 1960s Alex Karras and Paul Horning were banned for one year for gambling.
Not too many others as this is a very harsh ruling.
2007-08-06 18:58:59 · answer #3 · answered by Michael M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, the worst the Commissioner can do is 1 season like he did do Pacman Jones.
2007-08-08 21:06:47 · answer #4 · answered by steelersdynasty 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no innocent until proven guilty
2007-08-06 18:23:59 · answer #5 · answered by lightzout 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no
2007-08-06 18:16:56 · answer #6 · answered by zhayes123 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋